In a recent discussion published in the Russian journal Geomagnetizm i Aeronomiya (Vol. 43, pp. 132-135), two scientists from the Institute of Solar-Terrestrial Physics of the Siberian Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences challenge the politically-correct global warming dogma that vexes the entire world. Bashkirtsev and Mashnich (2003) say that "a number of publications report that the anthropogenic impact on the Earth's climate is an obvious and proven fact," when in actuality, in their opinion, "none of the investigations dealing with the anthropogenic impact on climate convincingly argues for such an impact."

In the way of contrary evidence, they begin by citing the work of Friis-Christensen and Lassen (1991), who first noted the close relationship (r = -0.95) between the length of the sunspot cycle and the surface air temperature of the Northern Hemisphere over the period 1861-1989, where "warming and cooling corresponded to short (~10 yr) and prolonged (~11.5 yr) solar cycles, respectively." They then cite the work of Zherebtsov and Kovalenko (2000), who they say established a high correlation (r = 0.97) between "the average power of the solar activity cycle and the surface air temperature in the Baikal region averaged over the solar cycle." These two findings, they contend, "leave little room for the anthropogenic impact on the Earth's climate." In addition, they note that "solar variations naturally explain global cooling observed in 1950-1970, which cannot be understood from the standpoint of the greenhouse effect, since CO2 was intensely released into the atmosphere in this period," citing in support of this statement the work of Dergachev and Raspopov (2000).

With respect to original work, Bashkirtsev and Mashnich conducted wavelet-spectra and correlation analyses of Irkutsk and world air temperatures and Wolf number data for the period 1882-2000, finding periodicities of 22 (Hale cycle) and 52 (Fritz cycle) years and reporting that "the temperature response of the air lags behind the sunspot cycles by approximately 3 years in Irkutsk and by 2 years over the entire globe."

Noting that one could thus expect the upper envelope of sunspot cycles to reproduce the global temperature trend, they created such a plot and found that such is indeed the case. As they describe their results, "the lowest temperatures in the early 1900s correspond to the lowest solar activity (weak cycle 14), the further temperature rise follows the increase in solar activity; the decrease in solar activity in cycle 20 is accompanied by the temperature fall [from 1950-1970], and the subsequent growth of solar activity in cycles 21 and 22 entails the temperature rise [of the last quarter century]."

With respect to the future, Bashkirtsev and Mashnich say "it has become clear that the current sunspot cycle (cycle 23) is weaker than the preceding cycles (21 and 22)," and that "solar activity during the subsequent cycles (24 and 25) will be, as expected, even lower," noting that "according to Chistyakov (1996, 2000), the minimum of the secular cycle of solar activity will fall on cycle 25 (2021-2026), which will result in the minimum global temperature of the surface air (according to our prediction)."

Are there any indications the prediction of Bashkirtsev and Mashnich will prove correct? They themselves say "the available data of observations support our inference about the cooling that has already started [our italics]," noting that "the average annual air temperature in Irkutsk, which correlates well with the average annual global temperature of the surface air, attained in 1997 its maximum equal to +2.3°C" and then "began to diminish to +1.2°C in 1998, +0.7°C in 1999, and +0.4°C in 2000."

Another indication of the likely validity of their prediction is provided by the work of Chavez et al. (2003), who document major changes in the biology of the Pacific Ocean that are associated with an oscillating climate cycle of about 50 years' periodicity. According to their findings, a warm-to-cool regime shift may already be in progress, having begun in the late 1990s, as is suggested by the temperature data of Bashkirtsev and Mashnich. Likewise, the study of Freeland et al. (2002) reports the invasion of the California Current by subarctic waters that in July 2002 were more than 0.5°C colder than the historical summer average for the period 1961-2000 off the coast of central Oregon, USA. In fact, at the most offshore station they studied, the upper halocline was more than 1°C colder than normal, which was "about 0.5°C colder than any prior observation," while in the Gulf of Alaska they report that "conditions in June 2002 [were]well outside the bounds of all previous experience," and in the summer of 2001 they were already "at the lower bound of previous experience."

Within this context it is also interesting to note, as reported in our Editorial of 16 April 2003, that three of North America's Great Lakes -- Superior, Erie and Huron -- froze over completely this past winter. Within the period for which reliable ice cover data are available for the five Great Lakes (1963 to the present), this is the first time all three of these lakes have simultaneously experienced 100% ice cover, according to the study of Assel et al. (2003).

In light of these several sets of real-world observations, we would not be at all surprised to find that Bashkirtsev and Mashnich will indeed be proven correct in their prediction of imminent, if not already-in-progress, global cooling.

The religion of the wacko left is going to take a big hit as this progresses across the west coast. Fish will be abundant again in N. Calif just as in the fifties. Ice breakers will travel the great lakes and the head of Boeing who thought he could sail on lake Michigan all year long is going to be pissed. Chicago is cold as heck when the lake feezes and the wind blows.

We are headed for a period of intense denial and anger on the part of the environmental wackos. These types of findings will be a boost to the Green Party and will drain off support for the Democrats. We'll also see more SUV's being sabotaged, more mink farms being raided and more people protesting by sitting in trees. This should be fun to watch.

"Superior completely froze last winter? Wow. Superior is more like a sea than a lake, I didn't think it would ever completely freeze."

THis is why the GLobal Warming movement is doomed to fail! People who live in Cleveland, Buffalo, Milwaukee, Detroit, Chicago, Erie, Green Bay, Duluth, etc. (cities near the lakes) will laugh in your face if you try and explain how the earth is getting warmer!

You can't really appreciate cold until you've spent a winter near the lakes!

The ice age 10,000 years ago came and WENT on its own,,,means the earth cooled and heated back to normal without human intervention or so called greenhouse gasses spewing forth..... proof enough that global warming induced by human activities is totally bogus...

Also the junk science that freon and clorine are floating up to high altitudes to zap oxone is bogus,,,this led to the needless ban of freon to a substitute that is a fraction as efficient,,,,,countless gallons of gas waisted for nothing,,,

These results cannot possibly help advance World Socialism so they must be wrong. Therefore the NYT and the LAT choose not to cover this research.

These studies will, if anything, cause a major upswing in propaganda junk science articles in the Marxist media. That's especially true when Democrat votes can be generated by publishing "We're all gonna' die!" stories designed to frighten the uninformed into voting for Rats. Global "warming" has generally been used by the Left as a fund-raising gimmick. No number of facts and logical argument can withstand the media's exploitation of the ignorant.

One thing is certain. These pollitcally-correct clods will never let facts get in the way of their politics because it's very in-convenient when it happens. There is nothing quite so satisfying as seeing and hearing one of them spluttering and fuming when confronted with the facts.

If i may respond, the answer is absolutely! The first study that i know of that convincingly correlated solar activity with global temps was done by a dutch researcher a few years ago. (The guys name was Svensmark i believe.) His results showed that the magnetic field of the sun is directly involved with cloud formation on earth. It goes something like this: During times when the magnetic field of the sun is strong (high 'solar activity'), cosmic rays bombarding the earth from space are blocked. Cosmic rays play a key role in cloud formation as when they penetrate the atmosphere they ionize dust particles and aerosols in the atmosphere causing them to attract to each other which enhances cloud seeding. So when the cosmic rays are blocked from reaching the earth by the sun's mag field, less clouds are formed, particularly low lying clouds which act to reflect sunlight and cool the earth. To simplify, temps increase with solar activity due to this action.

Of course there was a great uproar by the mullahs of the global warming religion that there was no way this could be possible. The truth hurts. And Kyoto and its militants deserve to be mocked and exposed for the frauds that they are.

These results cannot possibly help advance World Socialism so they must be wrong.

And furthermore, we on the central California coast are right now experiencing slightly higher-than-normal temperatures, or micro-global warming. And the California Republican Party is right now holding its annual political convention. Coincidence? Sure.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.